ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Rectal eversion: safe and effective way to achieve low transaction in minimally invasive Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery, short- and long-term outcomes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ileal Pouch-anal Anastomosis Complications and Pouch Failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIleal pouch-anal anastomosis remains a gold standard in restoring continence in patient with ulcerative colitis. Achieving low transection can be challenging and may require mucosectomy with a hand-sewn anastomosis. Rectal eversion (RE) technique provides a safe and effective alternative for both open and minimally invasive approaches. The purpose of this study is to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent RE when compared to those who underwent conventional trans-abdominal transection. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a retrospective review performed at tertiary care center. Patients undergoing proctectomy and pouch surgery by either standard approach or with RE from November 2004 to January 2017 were evaluated. Demographics, post-operative complications, as well as 1- and 3-year functional outcomes were analyzed.
resultsTotal of 176 underwent proctocolectomy with creation of a J pouch and 88 (50%) had the RE technique utilized. The RE group had a higher rate of corticosteroid use at the time of surgery 59.1 versus 39.8% (p = 0.0156), but otherwise groups were statistically similar. 20 cases (26.1%) of RE group and 54 (61%) of conventional group cases were accomplished in minimally invasive fashion. There was no difference in the rates of 30- and 90-day complications. Functional outcomes data were available for up to 78.4% of patient with trans-abdominal approach and 64.7% in RE group. At 1 and 3 years after surgery, there was no difference in the number of bowel movements, fecal incontinence, or nocturnal bowel movements. The rates of returning to ileostomy or pouch revision were the same.
conclusionRE technique is safe and effective way to achieve a low transaction in J pouch surgery. The technique provides similar functional outcomes at 1 and 3 years after surgery and can be particularly useful in minimally invasive approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31183794What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.